Everyone's idea of wheeling is different. The number of people that want extreme off-road wheeling is very small compared to the percentage of 4x4 owners. I have a purpose built rig that spends 99% of its time at a ORV park (i.e. Rocks & Valleys) as the public lands that I have access to don't provide the challenge that I am looking for.

That said - I am not going around bashing the access that we have in this state just because I use it. I know people with stock 4x4's that want to get out into the wilderness and enjoy OUR public lands. There are too many people out there that want to see our access removed and by us segregation just gives them more ammunition.

I am an avid hunter and I utilize many of our public lands and these trails are crucial to having access to these public areas. Public lands will never cater to the extreme 4x4 group like a ORV park as there are many people and interests that we need to recognize.

If you don't want to use the public lands and would rather use a private park then great, no one is forcing you to buy a ORV sticker for that purpose. But please don't bash something just because YOU don't use it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by feva4u

I fight for our sport by supporting the people that provide more wheeling opportunities than the state by spending my "Orv" money wheeling at private parks.

No where in there did I bash anyone, I stated a my opinion about "wheeling" in the state.

So one of the things that was discussed in length about this was the appropriations of the funds with the increase and what has been agreed upon is that the funds will still be split the same even with the increase.

So with the increase this will bring in more $$$ for ORV activities such as trail maintenance, developing new trails, etc.

From the way that it was explained to me the $26.25 sticker will get you the ability to license an ORV to drive on the shoulder of the road. To use trails and parks (such as Sliver Lake, Drummond Island and Saint Helen) you would have to purchase the $36.25 sticker. It is still unknown if there will be a base sticker with a "stamp" or two different stickers.

This increase is long overdue as it has been many years since the last price increase.

Additionally compare the cost of the sticker (and the $10 Rec Passport) to the price that you pay to get into an ORV park. Your cost of $46.25 ($36.25 ORV Sticker & $10 Rec Passport) is roughly the same cost as two trips to a ORV park. Since there is no limit on how many times you can use this you can really get your monies worth quickly.

You believe them? Ask the MSA how they feel about the trail permit sticker. The state royally fucked snowmobiles on that one and it was the MSA idea, and are talking about raising it again. By approving this increase the state has just out priced ORVs. You watch, there will be another increase within five years, and I bet it goes for over $70 a sticker. And anyone who thinks a price increase is long over due can eat shit

I don't mind in increase, but just like the snowmobile trail permit hike year after year, they don't use the money in the right ways IMO. my trail permits bought me access to the same barely maintained trails from 20 bucks to now 45 bucks year.. Ive sent emails to our counsel and guess what, it goes in one ear and out the other. Even though they receive more money, they have worse equipment than 5 years ago and maintain it less and less every year, in my eyes someone is stuffing their pockets. It was only a matter of time before they got to the ORV permits too.

I have no problem with the new sticker costs. I'm at Silver Lake a lot. Otherwise I normally am at R&V or an out-of-state park/location. So the new costs are still minimal compared to private parks, other state ORV, and fuel costs.

The sign picture posted above is my issue. The cost is what it is but when money is used for "restoration" projects because the people in the DNR think thats how the money shoukd be spent is BS. Other options have been presented to the DNR to maintain trails like the one that was closed but instead of letting the user groups control the supposed erosion problen the DNR believes exists they close it. The DNR has a complete misunderstanding of what we want or they just dont care.

I don't mind paying more for orv sticker if it means they will open up more trails in the state. As it is right now I can leagly take my jeep more places then my four wheeler just because it has a plate on it. The state has wasted so much money putting up guard rails to keep people out of places. Anyone who has been past the "pot holes" will know what I am talking about. Why can't we have a off road trail system like the motorcycle trails? I to have seen these restoration signs and they drive me crazy. I have seen the dnr right tickets for destroying wetlands then fill in the same wetlands in with gravel.

I was under the impression that the reason the sticker costs haven't changed is because the 16.25 number was guestimated years ago based on expected inflation increases to come out in a wash after 30 years or so.

I have a huge problem with the price going up. They will not use the increase to fund the trail system...just watch

They already do that with all of the sled trail permit $ WE PAY ALOT MORE FOR THE SLED TRAIL STICKER PLUS A SLED REGISTRATION EVERY 3 YRS.

They should register the atv's /utv's like cars and sleds do and leave the ORV cost where it is.

Right now on an atv in Michigan you have no proof of owner ship (registration) to carry with you when you ride. All you need is ORV sticker. Kinda dumb I think, not going to carry around a copy of my title incase I checked.

In Kalkaska they do get some $ for grooming and grading the trails in the summer. The Blue Bear trail is groomed at least once a month in the summer.

The sign picture posted above is my issue. The cost is what it is but when money is used for "restoration" projects because the people in the DNR think thats how the money shoukd be spent is BS. Other options have been presented to the DNR to maintain trails like the one that was closed but instead of letting the user groups control the supposed erosion problen the DNR believes exists they close it. The DNR has a complete misunderstanding of what we want or they just dont care.

I agree. Closing a hill that has been a mainstay for years just because ONE person wanted it closed with no review process is just wrong. The sign is a slap in the face.

However there are 2 separate discussion items here.
Should the fees go up to cover existing costs like silver lake? Yes
Is our current trail format correct? No

Regarding what it cost to develop st helen or the rocks at the mounds, there was well over $100,000 invested just in the rocks. Go ask Ron if they have that kind of money to invest.
I am all for the private parks. But I think the blend is a good thing.